The rights of the minority are not subject to a popular vote...

Being born something is irrelevant to whether or not we are entitled to that right. We're not born speakers of language, but we still have the freedom of speech. We're not born religions, but we have freedom of religion. And obviously, we are not born married. This is a silly argument.

This is a giant load of poo. How is someone not a parent because they're gay? What a ridiculous statement. And where is your peer reviewed research showing gay PARENTS are bad for children? I can bury you in research showing otherwise. Somehow, I don't think you care about science and reality, though.

 

30+ years. And I've related enough about that service to everyone already. I prefer to remain relatively anonymous here for now.

Nonsense. The laws being proposed are FAR from oppressive. Get real.

You check it. To me, it is enough. I think you need to get real... right along with Congress.

 

You need to realize that it is my business. If you do not think so, you are mistaken.

 

Well, the right to free speech is in the Constitution. The right to freedom of religion: in the Constitution. And, oh yeah, the right to bear arms? Yeah, it's in there. The right to get married? Hmm, don't see it anywhere. Perhaps it isn't a right at all. The Founders didn't seem to think it was a right worth mentioning anyway. So who gets to say what is a right and what is not?

 

What are you talking about? What does this do with my critique of the argument I replied to? You seem to be acting like I'm arguing against guns.

 

And, as you've said on this forum, you were both a 'grunt' and on active duty for over thirty years. Unless you want to change your story now, that's impossible, and anyone on this forum who was in the service knows so.

You see, this is the thing - you're the exact kind of person this thread is talking about.

 

LOL!! That's NOT what I said. Now, be brilliant and shut up... or quote me on that BS you just related.

All I have ever told anyone on this forum is that I DO have 30+ years in and am still serving. Now, if that is NOT enough for you... go find something else to do.

You don't even know what you're talking about.

And YOU are the kind of person I restrain myself from describing exactly as I sometimes wish to.

As far as firearms... we DO need better or more appropriate controls on them. That is reality, IMO.

 

I've called you out before on it - I don't care to sift through hundreds of threads. Simple fact is, no one but a liar or an idiot would cite their military experience, cite lengthy experience over three decades, and then refuse to state so much as their rank for 'privacy' reasons.

Now please, stop understanding the subject of the thread. Go look at the OP. Maybe you'll be able to stay on topic once you can comprehend it.

 

No, really it's none of your business what so ever. And, you claiming other wise makes you sound totally insane.

 

Sorry, my bad. Somebody said nobody is born a gun owner, then somebody else said no one is born married. I got confused and thought you were responding to the second argument. Don't drink and post, I guess.

 

Everybody is born a gun owner (an inalienable right), not everyone is born gay.

 

Good point. It probably meant to allow the states to regulate firearms ownership as they wished. But it also allowed that no state should be able to completely ban the right of ownership of private firearms because to do so would render that state unable to provide militia when called upon. Any law that suggested an outright ban would be prima facie unconstitutional because it would threaten the security of the state and the nation which back then relied upon militia.

 

No, you have a right to purchase a gun, but you are not born with a gun.

You're not wrong, but on the same hand, you're not right either. Not everyone is born gay, but some people are born gay.

 

Why does the majority get to vote how much of an individuals income they'll steal.

 

Erll that interpretation is no longer valid, if that is what they meant. Regulated State militias no longer have any official use, since the formation of the national guard.

 

I think the idea is that the Constitution was about the limits of government. The rights mentioned are presumed to be available to all (except slaves at the time) simply by virtue of their being born. The Constitution doesn't actually confer rights.

 

Agreed, but I was thinking of the state of mind of the drafters of the Constitution at that time. The militia justification has been overtaken by decisions from the US Sup Ct even though some folks try to drag it out to bolster contemporary arguments and end up with egg on their face.

 

Nonsense. The national guard simply serves as the cadre around which various militia units can form in time of crisis.

 

So, a baby can own a shot gun?

And where is your evidence that people aren't born gay? Are you saying you could choose to be gay yourself? And what does that have to do with the right to marry?

 

It is not up to me to prove that you can 't be born gay, rather it is up to you to prove that you can. To date that hasn't been shown. Again there is every bit as much evidence that Sociopaths are born that way. To be born psychologically screwed up does not of necessity confer upon others a need to tolerate the fact that you are psychologically screwed up.

 

True, but the question remains: who or what determines what is or is not a right?

 

You are wrong about that. May sound "insane" to you... but certainly not to everyone else.

 

Again, you really don't know what you are talking about. Just back off of me, and stick to the topic. I don't intend to cooperate with you, so move away from talking about 'me' per se. It's either that or go "sift" and stop being difficult about this; it's nonsense.

 

Riveting stuff.

 

Ok, here's a quote from University of Illinois researcher on the genes of homosexuality Brian Mustanski, "It's pretty definitive that biological factors play a role in determining a person's sexual orientation." This comes from the article http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2002340883_gayscience19m.html
While there is no 'gay gene' there is much evidence that people are born gay. Why would there be so many gay teen suicides if it was a choice? It's not a choice. These people do not choose to live in the oppressed minority. They do not choose the orientation that confuses them and makes their ignorant religious communities resent them.